Thursday, May 24, 2007

Security guards are still fighting for fair wages and affordable healthcare. AlliedBarton seems to think it is reasonable that some officers are paying as much as $200 per month for family healthcare. AlliedBarton seems to think it is reasonable that officers who agree to take the most difficult, night-shifts do not receive extra pay - unlike every other service worker on campus. We disagree!

The fight is not won, yet. Let's make sure Harvard and AlliedBarton know that we will not accept an unfair contract. Living wage now! Affordable healthcare now!

Thursday, May 17, 2007

With incredibly high turnout, security officers have unanimously voted to endorse a strike.

They are still in bargaining with AlliedBarton, their direct employer, but have yet to see a wage proposal that adequately reflects that wages they deserve. If security officers are forced to strike to secure a fair and decent contract, we are prepared to stand behind them 100%.

Going on strike is a big risk for security officers and we are disappointed that Harvard and AlliedBarton have allowed the campaign to come to this point. We hope that the involved parties will make progress in negotiations in the upcoming days, and a strike can be avoided. However, we MUST prepare for a strike and we are asking for supporters to donate to the strike fund.

The undersigned members of the Harvard Class of 1957 had prepared the following letter to be sent to President Bok, President-Elect Faust, the Harvard Corporation and the Crimson, when they learned of the interim settlement of the dispute involving the University, campus security guards and student activists.We are sending this letter to The Crimson now because the announced settlement does not demonstrate to us any change in Harvard management's basic anti-labor policy.

As we prepare to gather for our 50th Reunion, we are saddened to learn that Harvard, once again, has failed the test of accommodation to a demand for social justice.

With the power and wealth Harvard has at its disposal, for the University to dismiss with a fine impartiality the demand of security guards for a living wage, for compensation comparable to Harvard's other service employees, is unconscionable. For the University to claim that it is not a party to the dispute because it involves a Harvard contractor and its employees is, to say the least, disingenuous.

Why do students have to go on a hunger strike to engage the University? Why is it that, on issue after issue, going back for years, Harvard's first response to an appeal for equity is to resist?

We have seen a long-term pattern of failure to protect the civil liberties of students and faculty, cooperation with government witchhunts, discrimination in faculty appointments on political, racial and sexual grounds, and failure to take a strong and moral position against those forces that perpetuate discrimination and injustice. Harvard too often pays lip service to humanistic values but aligns itself in practice with repressive forces.

It is long past time for the University to put its money where its mouth is.

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

thousands have signed onto the campaign.hundreds have come out to our daily rallies.we've set the stage for a fair & decent contract,NOW we must continue the pressure until the papers are signed!

people from all across the city will be coming out to show their support for security officers and their impending strike. i know everyone is busy with finals, but we can't let this campaign go just yet. please come out and bring everyone you know!

Monday, May 14, 2007

Prof. Noam Chomsky contributed to our campaign and wrote to administrators at Harvard. Here is his message of support for us:

I would like to express my firm support and admiration for your courageous actions in putting yourselves on the line to support the elementary rights of campus workers at Harvard, and wish you the greatest success in this honorable efforts.- Noam Chomsky

Saturday, May 12, 2007

I am writing to support the Stand for Security Campaign and students who ask: Does not this great university have the fiscal, political, and moral resources to guarantee that the people who protect our students earn a decent wage? Legalistic or bureaucratic answers, evasions of responsibility, have not been (nor will be) convincing because the fundamental question is moral. Such moral questions are not abstract.

In the Jewish tradition, justice and compassion, not to be confused with the concept of justice or the concept of compassion, express our ability to recognize and respond to living people with whom we are connected. What is at stake is our response-ability, with heart and body, to enable the dignity of our fellow members of the Harvard community with whom students interact daily on a face-to-face basis.

Isaiah, a Jewish teacher who lived in the 7th century BCE, cried out to the people of Jerusalem: “You oppress all your workers!” and implored: “Share your bread with the hungry; take the poor into your home, and do not ignore your own kin.”

We at Harvard must take care of our own, of our people who care for the lives of our students.

Friday, May 11, 2007

We ended our strike primarily because the workers were very concerned about our health and wanted us to end, but before we ended we got some concessions from today morning's talks with Harvard admin. More importantly, the workers told us that our pressure broke a 26 day impasse in negotiations, and that Allied-Barton agreed to more dates of negotiation and also finally came through with a wage proposal.

Here are the concessions from today's talks, summarized.

1. A letter signed by Marilyn Hausammann, reaffirming the university's commitment to those of our demands that were in line with the Katz Committee's recommendations, pertaining to subcontractors, including a: Wages and benefits: - not using outsourcing to lower wages and weaken unions. - employment an contacting practices should reflect humane concern for all employees whether directly employed or not - being a good employer is defined as providing wages benefits and other conditions of employment neccessary to attract, retain and motivate employees, and compensation levels that contribute to ensuring that workers and their families enjoy at least a minimally decent standard of living b: Due grievance process and fair treatment - Workers should be treated with dignity and respect by supervisors, fellow workers and other members of the Harvard community. - No employees at Harvard should be subject to intimidation, retaliation, or abuse by supervisors or others in authority positions relative to them.

2. In the letter is also a provision regarding an audit of Allied Barton's compliance or non compliance with the Wages and Benefits Parity Policy. At our last meeting we won an expedited audit that will be complete by early next week (we were told Monday or Tuesday though this date is not on the letter; instead they state "the week of May 14").

In this letter coming out of this meeting, they promise to - make the audit results public - arrange a meeting with reps from SLAM and other members of the community (they agreed to worker and faculty representation at the meeting) as soon as possible after the audit - more than one meeting to discuss these issues.

We stated at the meeting that we expect to deal with the specific ways in which Allied-Barton is non-compliant with the Wages and Benefits Parity Policy, but also with the ways in which Harvard has implemented the WBPP.

------Onward into the next phase of struggle! This struggle is working, but what we have done so far means nothing if we fizzle out and don't keep up the pressure until the point in time when it will be most effective ie: when the negotiations between Allied-Barton and the union come through. If the guards end up with a bad contract, what we have so far counts for nothing. Its value is only as groundwork moving towards a better contract.